Journal of Chemical Physics
Feedback | Help | Exit
The Journal of Chemical Physics
   
 
 
 
Previous Article
Transport properties of Mie(14,7) fluids: Molecular dynamics simulation and theory
An extensive computer simulation study is presented for the self-diffusion coefficient, the shear viscosity, and the thermal conductivity of Mie(14,7) fluids. The time-correlation function formalism o...
Next Article
Quantum dynamic of sticking of a H atom on a graphite surface
A quantum study of the sticking of a hydrogen atom chemisorbed onto graphite (0001) surface was carried out also including the phonon modes of the system in the collinear scattering approximation. A n...

The importance of polarizability in the modeling of solubility: Quantifying the effect of solute polarizability on the solubility of small nonpolar solutes in popular models of water

J. Chem. Phys. 129, 024508 (2008); doi:10.1063/1.2953324

Published 10 July 2008

You are not logged in to this journal. Log in

Peter J. Dyer,1 Hugh Docherty,1 and Peter T. Cummings1,2
1Department of Chemical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37235-1604, USA
2Nanomaterials Theory Institute, Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6494, USA
In recent work by Paschek [J. Chem. Phys. 120, 6674 (2004)] and others [see H. Docherty et al., J. Chem. Phys. 125, 074510 (2006) for a review] it has been suggested that, when coupled to a simple Lennard-Jones model for various small nonpolar solute molecules, the most common models of water (e.g., SPC/E and TIP4P) fail to reproduce quantitatively the solubility of small nonpolar solute molecules in water due in part to failing to account for polarization of the solute molecule. Given the importance of such systems as test-case prototype models of the solubility of proteins and biomolecules, in this work, we investigate the impact of using a polarizable solute model with the SPC/E, TIP3P, TIP4P, TIP4P-Ew, and TIP4P/2005 rigid water models. Specifically we consider Ne, Ar, Kr, Xe, and methane as solutes. In all cases we observe that the use of a polarizable solute improves agreement between experiment and simulations, with the best agreement seen for the largest solutes, Kr, CH4, and Xe and the modern reparametrizations of the TIP4P model, i.e., the TIP4P-Ew and TIP4P/2005 models. ©2008 American Institute of Physics
History: Received 14 March 2008; accepted 11 June 2008; published 10 July 2008
Permalink: http://link.aip.org/link/?JCPSA6/129/024508/1
BUY THIS ARTICLE   (US$28)
Download HTML Download Sectioned HTML Download PDF (123 kB) View Cart

KEYWORDS and PACS

Keywords
PACS
  • 64.75.Bc
    Solubility
  • 64.75.Gh
    Phase separation and segregation in model systems
  • 61.20.Gy
    Theory and models of liquid structure
  • 61.20.Qg
    Structure of associated liquids
  • 34.20.-b
    Interatomic and intermolecular potentials and forces, potential energy surfaces for collisions
  • YEAR: 2008

RELATED DATABASES


To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.

PUBLICATION DATA

ISSN:
0021-9606 (print)   1089-7690 (online)
Publisher:
AIP is a member of CrossRef AIP

REFERENCES (31)
View in Separate Window/Tab
For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
  1. E. D. Sloan, Nature (London) 426, 353 (2003).
  2. I. Lerche and E. Bagirov, Energy Exploration and Exploitation 22, 3 (2004).
  3. T. Appenzeller, Science 252, 1990 (1991).
  4. S. Harrison, S. Swaminathan, D. Beveridge, and R. Ditchfield, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 14, 319 (1978).
  5. T. D. O'Sullivan and N. O. Smith, J. Phys. Chem. 74, 1460 (1970).
  6. D. Chandler, Nature (London) 437, 640 (2005).
  7. J. Errington, G. Boulougouris, I. Economou, A. Panagiotopoulos, and D. Theodorou, J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 8865 (1998).
  8. J. Li, R. Car, C. Tang, and N. Wingreen, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 2626 (2007).
  9. S. Dec, K. Bowler, L. Stadterman, C. Koh, and E. Sloan, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 414 (2006).
  10. H. J. C. Benendsen, J. R. Grigera, and T. P. Straatsma, J. Phys. Chem. 91, 6269 (1987).
  11. W. L. Jorgensen, J. Chandrasekhar, J. D. Madura, R. W. Impey, and M. L. Klein, J. Chem. Phys. 79, 926 (1983).
  12. J. O. Hirschfelder, C. F. Curtiss, and R. B. Bird, Molecular Theory of Gases and Liquids (Wiley, New York, 1954).
  13. B. Guillot and Y. Guissani, J. Chem. Phys. 99, 8075 (1993).
  14. D. Paschek, J. Chem. Phys. 120, 6674 (2004).
  15. P. E. Krouskop, J. D. Madura, D. Paschek, and A. Krukau, J. Chem. Phys. 124, 016102 (2006).
  16. H. Docherty, A. Galindo, C. Vega, and E. Sanz, J. Chem. Phys. 125, 074510 (2006).
  17. J. L. F. Abascal and C. Vega, J. Chem. Phys. 123, 234505 (2005).
  18. S. J. Plimpton, J. Comput. Phys. 117, 1 (1995).
  19. R. W. Hockney, Computer Simulation Using Particles (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1981).
  20. P. P. Ewald, Ann. Phys. 64, 253 (1921).
  21. B. A. Luty, M. E. Davis, I. G. Tironi, and W. F. Vangusteren, Mol. Simul. 14, 11 (1994).
  22. A. E. Ismail, G. S. Grest, and M. J. Stevens, J. Chem. Phys. 125, 014702 (2006).
  23. B. Widom, J. Chem. Phys. 39, 2808 (1963).
  24. H. W. Horn, W. C. Swope, J. W. Pitera, J. D. Madura, T. J. Dick, G. L. Hura, and T. Head-Gordon, J. Chem. Phys. 120, 9665 (2004).
  25. A. T. Wong, G. B. Bacskay, and N. S. Hush, Mol. Phys. 74, 1037 (1991).
  26. D. R. Lide, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 88th ed. (CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2007).
  27. D. Wolf, P. Keblinski, S. R. Phillpot, and J. Eggebrecht, J. Chem. Phys. 110, 8254 (1999).
  28. C. J. Fennell and J. D. Gezelter, J. Chem. Phys. 124, 234104 (2006).
  29. C. Avendano and A. Gil-Villegas, Mol. Phys. 104, 1475 (2006).
  30. P. Demontis, S. Spanu, and G. B. Suffritti, J. Chem. Phys. 114, 7980 (2001).
  31. R. F. Prini and R. Crovetto, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 18, 1231 (1989).

CITING ARTICLES
For access to citing articles, you need to log in.
For access to citing articles, you need to Log in.


Copyright © American Institute of Physics